Disgusting Anti-Gay Amendments

[liberalmuse]

I am furious! I was talking to my next door neighbor as she was holding her adorable toddler, and she asked me if I was voting 'No' on Amendment 3 here in Utah. Of course I am, but while I thought it was yet another noxious attempt to ban gay marriage so insecure heteros can feel better about themselves, I found out from her that if this Amendment is passed, she, her partner and their baby will have their health insurance taken away. Here is the Amendment. Note provision 2: http://tinyurl.com/53gs8.

This is revolting. Barbaric. My neighbor, who is young, has deteriorating disks in her back and her partner works at one of the 7 companies in Utah that offers health insurance for gay couples. How could anyone do this to another human being? There are a lot of gay couples and yes, many have children who will be greatly effected by this. Members of the Mormon church are pushing this bigtime, though the official Mormon church will not take a stance on this. As are most Xtians in this godforsaken state.

To top it off, my fundie mother is blowing into town next week because, get this, she doesn't feel welcome at my sister's place in Oregon anymore. Why? Because my level-headed sister blew it after my mom started spewing the hate-speech passages of the Bible against gays at her in her own house. So while I'd rather my mom vote in Utah than in Ohio or Oregon, she will definitely be another vote for Amendment 3. What is wrong with these people?

[benddem]

1. Oregon has a similar law

Yesterday there was a commercial that stated "our founding fathers never intended for marriage to be anything but a man and a woman." Guess they'd be surprised if they read the constitution and found the word "marriage" doesn't exist.
It really is disgusting. The only thing I can figure that gay marriage could affect me is that I will have to buy wedding gifts for my gay friends...and I thought I was free.

[liberalmuse]

4. Yeah, and there'll be gay divorces...

The Amendment here in Utah wants to dissolve any rights domestic partners might have on top of the marrige ban, which is uneccessary since Utah law defines marriage as 'between a man and a woman'. This entire thing is bigotry, plain and simple. And it's unChristian and unAmerican.

I wouldn't even vote for a law preventing freepers from breeding, as difficult as that would be not to do. That's how strongly I feel about passing Amendments that take rights away from others.

[Philostopher]

2. What's really obnoxious about the one in Ohio is ...

it not only bans official gay marriages, it also makes it impossible for the state to ever honor 'civil unions,' and it prohibits businesses and organizations from recognizing any compact other than a legal marriage between a man and a woman. What this means is that colleges and universities, and companies like NCR and (I think) Reynolds & Reynolds, which provide bennies like health insurance for significant others and gay partners, will no longer be able to provide such benefits. The ACLU and various rights organizations have hopped on this one, but I'm afraid there are enough thoughtless card-punchers here in Ohio it's going to pass anyway. It makes me sick -- however they want to impose their right-wing agenda, they're stupid for trying to tell companies who offer unmarried partner benefits that they can't offer them. The companies and educational organizations that offer them wouldn't bother if they didn't see an improvement in the talent they attract -- what the f*ck?

[liberalmuse]

5. That's about the gist of this Amendment.

And yes, as someone else has said here, I wonder how the Mormons would feel if the fundies decided to take away their rights. I know how much fundies hate the Mormons and Catholics, so this is not an improbable scenario if this country completes its slide into Christoapocalypticfacism.

[Philostopher]

9. I like to remind religious people who like these kinds of things

that it wasn't always their religion that was the flavor of the putsch, and next time around, it might not be again -- so how will they feel when suddenly their particular flavor is taboo?

[countmyvote4real]

6. Sounds like there could be fewer jobs in Ohio.

How about an amendment against fucking the state?

Wait a minute. I guess you can fuck whatever you want as long as you don't intend to marry it. And even this has problems when it's between a man and a woman.

[Philostopher]

8. Yeah, pretty much.

As long as you don't expect it to have health insurance, or inherit your property when you die, you can fuck it all you want.

[BOSSHOG]

3. "THE CONSTITUTION IS NOT A WEAPON"

Once again we have an uphill fight however my argument to my neanderthal neighbors has at least given them pause:

What if the next segment of our society targeted by hateful zealots includes you? How are you going to vote for a constitutional amendment then? The constitution is not a weapon to be wielded by thugs like tom dumbass delay. It is a shield to protect all our citizens, even the ones you hate. And I get in a personal dig to the testosterone laden crowd; you must be extremely suspect of your own sexuality if you think gay marriage would threaten yours.

I spent 24 years in the Navy defending the Constitution. Fascists ain't gonna fuck with it without a fight from me. Please feel free to look em in the eye, kick em in the butt and poke in the chest with my argument.

[TaleWgnDg]

7. and that's not all . . .

you see, the FEDERAL constitutional amendment (the one Bush wants) will take-away all the gains that gays have made over the years.

That's why the federal amendment is worded in that way.

For example, the federal amendment will remove domestic partnerships, insurance benefits to gay couples and their children, civil unions, the right of gay couples to visit each other in the hospital, child custody issues, inheritance rights, real estate transfer rights, arguably adoptions and guardianships, remove Massachusetts gay marriage and all its benefits and obligations, remove the chance of reciprocity with foreign marriages such as Canadian gay marriages, and all other benefits that have been gained that may be said to be similar to those granted to same-sex marrieds.

It goes much further than merely the marriage union, itself.

Most Americans are unaware that their congress has raised this issue, again and again . . . most Americans don't realize that it's not just about "straight" marriage or treating gays "equally."

Most Americans do NOT REALIZE that the federal amendment will remove all the benefits of marriage-like "stuff" that the various states have granted to gay couples.

And it will be the law across ALL OF AMERICA since it would be in our federal constitution, thereby over-riding all state laws, judges case law, and state constitutions.

It will expressly place, for the very first time, blatant legal discrimination against a group of people, in our federal constitution. That's an outrage!

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

****************************
"I believe that it points up the fact that we
need common sense judges who understand
that our rights were derived from God. Those
are the kind of judges I intend to put on the bench."
— GWBush, June 27, 2002, explaining his litmus
test for federal judicial nominees
****************************